Intel Corp (INTC.O) said on Tuesday that it had made broad cuts to employee and executive pay, a week after the company issued a lower-than-expected sales forecast driven by a loss of market share to rivals and a PC market downturn.

The reductions will range from 5% of base pay for mid-level employees to as much as 25% for Chief Executive Pat Gelsinger, while the company’s hourly workforce’s pay will not be cut, said a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Intel spokesperson Addy Burr said in a statement that the “changes are designed to impact our executive population more significantly and will help support the investments and overall workforce.”

Intel last week said its profit margins were plunging as the PC market cools after several years of growth during the pandemic.

Gelsinger also conceded that Intel has “stumbled” and lost market share to rivals such as Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD.O), which on Tuesday reported quarterly sales that were above Wall Street’s expectations.

The person familiar with Intel’s pay cuts said that in addition to 5% decreases for mid-level employees, vice president level employees will see 10% reductions and the company’s top executives other than the CEO will get 15% cuts.

The company has also lowered its 401(k) matching program from 5% to 2.5% and suspended merit raises and quarterly performance bonuses, the person said.

Annual performance bonuses based Intel’s overall financial performance will remain but those bonuses have been smaller in recent years as the company has lost ground to rivals, the person added.

Actor Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter on Tuesday for showing a “reckless” disregard for safety that led to the fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of the Western movie “Rust” in New Mexico in 2021, according to court documents.

District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies filed charges following months of speculation as to whether she had evidence that Baldwin acted with criminal negligence when a revolver with which he was rehearsing fired a live round that killed Hutchins.

Baldwin and set armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed were each charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter. The most serious charge, which carries a potential sentence of five years in jail, would require prosecutors to convince a jury that Baldwin acted with willful disregard for the safety of others.

A lawyer for Baldwin declined to comment. Gutierrez-Reed’s lawyer said the prosecutor had “completely misunderstood the facts and has reached the wrong conclusions.”

Baldwin’s case is remarkable in that there is little or no precedent for a Hollywood actor to face criminal charges for an on-set shooting.

A statement of probable cause by the prosecution’s special investigator, Robert Shilling, made clear Baldwin was being charged as an actor and producer on the low-budget movie.

Baldwin’s failure to get sufficient firearms training, check with the armorer whether the revolver was loaded, or address safety complaints from crew were cited by Shilling as some of his many “extremely reckless acts or reckless failures to act” in the 10-day period leading up to Hutchins’ death.

The “30 Rock” actor has denied responsibility for the shooting inside a movie-set church, saying Hutchins directed him to point the gun at the camera, he cocked the revolver but never pulled the trigger.

Baldwin said live ammunition should never have been allowed on the set and it was the job of Gutierrez-Reed and first assistant director Dave Halls to ensure the gun was unloaded, a position supported by many actors and the SAG-AFTRA union.

Videos from inside the church prior to the shooting show Baldwin with his finger on the trigger, Shilling said.

An FBI forensic test of the revolver found it “functioned normally” and would not fire without the trigger being pulled.

The prosecution used Baldwin’s comments to media against him, saying the investigation showed he deviated from firearm safety protocols that he laid out in television interviews.

“Baldwin would have been better served not making public statements about these incidents,” said Kate Mangels, an attorney with entertainment law firm Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump Holley.

Still, prosecutors could face long odds convincing a jury Baldwin is criminally liable as he was assured the gun was not loaded and it will be difficult to blame him for all the movie’s alleged safety failures, legal analysts said

No other “Rust” producer has been charged.

Charging documents held Gutierrez-Reed responsible for “allowing live ammunition on the set,” but did not accuse her of physically introducing them onto the production.

Gutierrez-Reed has said she brought two boxes of dummy rounds onto the set from a previous movie. Supply company PDQ Arms and Prop also provided dummy rounds and blanks. An FBI test found live long Colt .45 rounds taken from PDQ in Albuquerque did not match those found at the movie set, including the round that killed Hutchins and wounded director Joel Souza.

As armorer responsible for firearm safety and training, Gutierrez-Reed failed to provide sufficient instruction to Baldwin, check rounds loaded into the revolver or remain present in the rehearsal to ensure the actor did not point the weapon at Hutchins, the special investigator said.

Gutierrez-Reed has said she checked that the rounds were dummies before handing the gun to Halls and leaving the church due to COVID protocols. Halls then handed it to Baldwin, telling him it was a “cold gun,” meaning it did not contain an explosive charge, according to police.

Halls has signed a plea deal for a misdemeanor charge and is expected to cooperate with the prosecution.

Gutierrez-Reed has said producers denied her requests for extra firearms training, including with Baldwin.

Gabrielle Pickle, line producer on the movie, on Dec. 20 testified to New Mexico’s worker safety agency (OSHA) that all of Gutierrez-Reed’s requests for extra days for armorer duties were granted.

On Dec. 7 Gutierrez-Reed testified to OSHA that Baldwin’s lack of knowledge and “poor form” in using a revolver may have led to the discharge that killed Hutchins.

Her lawyer Jason Bowles said Halls, her senior in the production, was at fault for not calling Gutierrez-Reed back into the church to perform her armorer duties.

“We will fight these charges and expect that a jury will find Hannah not guilty,” he said in a statement.

The defendants face a court arraignment, which can be done virtually, then a preliminary hearing where a judge will decide whether there is probable cause to move forward with a trial. Preliminary hearings are typically scheduled within 60 days of charges being filed.

Related Galleries:

Street little ones are bad or homeless children who live on the streets of a city, town, or village. Homeless youth are typically named …

source

The post blendon living by the street Ukraine war appeared first on Ukraine Intelligence.

The setting was Helsinki in Finland. It was 2018, and Donald Trump, standing beside his hero Putin, announced he believed Putin over our own security agencies. This was about interfering in our elections. As you likely remember, Trump’s words caused shock to break out, and even today, those words live on in memory.

Of course, Trump at the time denied, denied, denied. Reporters misunderstood the words he said, Trump exclaimed. He lied. And finally, after all these years, the candidate of the Kremlin has spoken his truth.

On Truth social, Trump launched a bitter attack against the FBI and CIA. He accused them of undermining him. Then the Kremlin’s candidate said the following: “Remember in Helsinki when a 3rd rate reporter asked me, essentially, who I trusted more, president Putin of Russia or our intelligence lowlifes? My instinct at the time was that we had really bad people. Who would you choose, Putin or these misfits?”

And there it is. Out of the mouths of babes — in this case — the Kremlin’s baby, the king of Russian admiration, said it himself. From Trump with love — Russian love.

One need not look any further than these words to know Trump’s true nature. I cannot stress enough how awful these words are. I know I have written many articles on Trump. And he has had many outbursts. But these words are blasphemous. I truly hope the world is paying attention. I truly hope people care.

We care. So do most sane people. I expect the GOP will stay silent on this as they do on everything Trump does. They are nothing any longer than Trump’s useful idiots, just as trump is Putin’s useful idiot.

The danger that we intercepted and fought off in Trump is so huge, so startling that sometimes it feels like it couldn’t have been real. Who talks like that, one might ask? What kind of person would swear an alliance with a murderous dictator who executes children, families, and journalists?

The answer, of coarse, is Donald Trump. Trump lied all those years ago when he tried to deny what he’d said. This time he has finally said something true. He has shown us a bit of the darkness that makes up his core.

I love America. I’m sure you do as well. And I love Ukraine. Trump does not. He does, however, cherish and adore Russia. He devotes himself to the wants and needs of Putin. He shows solidarity with America’s enemies. He is truly the Kremlin’s candidate through and through.

The post Donald Trump is still doing Vladimir Putin’s bidding appeared first on Palmer Report.

An American official on Tuesday made the most direct comments by a U.S. authority to date acknowledging the existence of a deal with Japan and the Netherlands for those countries to impose new restrictions on exports of chipmaking tools to China.

“We can’t talk about the deal right now,” Deputy Commerce Department Secretary Don Graves said on the sidelines of an event in Washington. “But you can certainly talk to our friends in Japan and the Netherlands.”

Bloomberg reported on Friday an agreement had been finalized and two people familiar with the matter later confirmed the news to Reuters.

The United States in October imposed sweeping export restrictions on shipments of chipmaking tools to China, seeking to hobble Beijing’s ability to supercharge its chip industry and enhance its military capabilities.

For the restrictions to be effective, though, Washington needed to bring on board the Netherlands and Japan, home to chipmaking powerhouses ASML (ASML.AS) and Tokyo Electron (8035.T), among others.

The Commerce Department said in an email it will continue to coordinate on export controls with allies.

“We recognize that multilateral controls are more effective than unilateral controls, and foreign engagement on these controls is a … priority,” the agency said.

Officials from the Netherlands and Japan were in Washington discussing a wide range of issues in talks led by White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan on Friday.

When asked on Friday if an agreement on semiconductors had been discussed, U.S. President Joe Biden said: “Yes, we talked about a lot of things, but a lot of it is private.”

Related Galleries:

Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images

• Law enforcement agencies could have prevented the Jan. 6 attack, a committee investigator said.
• Tim Heaphy told NBC News that the FBI and DHS had important intel but failed to act on it.
• The Congressional committee investigating the attack downplayed law enforcement’s role in the riot.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security, and several other law enforcement agencies had the intelligence necessary to stop the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack before it ever began but failed to take adequate action in time, according to a top insurrection investigator and former federal prosecutor.

Tim Heaphy, who served as chief investigative counsel for the House Select Committee investigating the siege, told NBC News in an exclusive interview this week that the panel ultimately downplayed the agencies’ culpability in its final 845-page report released in December.

Lawmakers who investigated the attack emphatically laid the blame on Donald Trump, outlining how the former president sparked the violent riot with his repeated lies about the 2020 presidential election.  

Heaphy told NBC he doesn’t discount the committee’s Trump-centric conclusion, but said the panel failed to stress the outsized role law enforcement played in allowing the insurrection to unfold. 

“Law enforcement had a very direct role in contributing to the security failures that led to the violence,” he told the outlet. 

It wasn’t a lack of pertinent intelligence that led to violence on Jan. 6, but a failure to respond accordingly to an array of online leads and tips ahead of the attack, according to Heaphy, who cited findings from the committee’s Blue Team, a group of investigators specifically focused on the role of the FBI, DHS, Secret Service, Capitol Police, Department of Defense, and Washington, D.C. police that day. 

The Blue Team’s findings were never included in any of the committee’s 10 televised hearings, Heaphy told NBC, and the panel’s final report downplayed the team’s findings, saying law enforcement couldn’t have predicted Trump’s behavior. 

But Heaphy told the outlet that investigators cemented several significant findings related to the responding federal agencies on Jan. 6, including that Capitol police didn’t deploy enough officers to defend the building; the FBI and DHS failed to stress the possibility of violence by domestic extremists ahead of the attack; the FBI and DHS avoided using “open source” intelligence on social media out of a “misplaced” fear of violating free speech; the FBI and DHS failed to combine forces and share a joint warning about the threats they were documenting which could have paved the way for a stronger initial defense; and there was general confusion about which federal agency was in charge that day.

The committee encountered “numerous” examples of legitimate intelligence that were either ignored or downplayed ahead of the attack, Heaphy said. Researchers have since found much of it online post-riot, including a Dec. 27, 2020 post on Donald.win, in which a tipster warned of an “attempted coup/terrorist attack on Jan. 6th,” begging officials to “please please take this tip seriously and investigate further,” the outlet reported.

“There’s no question that this was relatively unprecedented,” Heaphy told NBC. “That said, there were plenty of indications that there could be violence, and law enforcement could have and should have done a better job of anticipating that.”

Sources told the outlet that the committee chose to pair down mentions of law enforcement failures in its public presentations in order to keep the focus on Trump. Previous reporting indicated Rep. Liz Cheney, the committee’s Republican vice chair, in particular, was intent on keeping the panel’s work Trump-heavy.

Neither the FBI nor DHS immediately responded to Insider’s request for comment.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

• The House just used an open process for amending legislation for the first time in 7 years.
• Democrats proposed nearly 60 amendments to a largely symbolic bill put forward by the GOP.
• The use of the process — a concession from McCarthy to his right flank — has some Democrats excited.

For the first time in nearly seven years, the House of Representatives did something that one might expect it to do on any normal day: engage in a relatively free-form debate over amendments to a major piece of legislation.

On Thursday and Friday of last week, the House used a so-called “open amendment” process to churn through 56 amendments — almost all of which were proposed by Democrats — to a bill teed up by the new Republican majority. 

It’s the first time the process, one of the concessions Kevin McCarthy made to the right-flank of his party to secure the House Speaker seat, has been used since May 26, 2016. In the nearly seven years since, under Democratic and Republican speakers, members have essentially been asked to swallow bills put forward by party leadership, or have been allowed to vote on a highly limited number of pre-determined amendments.

“I tend to favor policy and procedural changes that decentralize powers to the members,” said Democratic Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York, who told Insider that he “loved” Republicans’ use of the procedure. “Even a broken clock is right twice a day.”

“I think it was refreshing to be able to offer these kinds of amendments,” said Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, who offered three amendments to the bill and said progressives had long argued for opening up the rules process.

“I mean, I generally favor an open system in Congress,” said Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro, who also offered an amendment and noted that he used a similar open amendment process as a state legislator. “That’s what I did for 10 years in Texas.”

The return of open amendments

Increasing the use of that process — which allows rank-and-file lawmakers to submit amendments to be voted upon by the whole of the House — was a major part of the Freedom Caucus’s stated agenda. 

The potential move towards open amendment votes would represent a sea change from the way that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ran the institution over the last four years. 

A recent analysis by the Bipartisan Policy Center shows that the number of so-called “open rules” dropped to zero under her tenure, frustrating more junior members in particular by offering them less input into the legislative process. 

But in interviews with Insider this week, Democrats also expressed skepticism that the use of open rules would be more than a one-time thing; the open rules that the chamber utilized last week were provided for as part of the House GOP’s rules package.

“We’ll see how long this lasts,” said Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, a long-time ally of Pelosi. “If they start losing on a bunch of amendments, they will reconsider.”

And they pointed out that the current divided government, in which bills passed in a Republican-led House generally stand little chance in the Democratic-led Senate, lowers the stakes of amendments.

“I think one reason that the Republican majority is willing to do this is because they know that none of the bills they pass will actually become law,” said Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu of California, who nonetheless said he was “pleased” to offer a “great” amendment last week.

The House was voting on the Strategic Production Response Act, a Republican-proposed bill that would limit President Joe Biden’s ability to tap the strategic petroleum reserve without drawing up plans to increase the amount of public land available for oil and gas drilling. 

It was essentially a conservative messaging bill. Just one House Democrat voted for it, Biden has threatened to veto it, and it faces no chance in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Nonetheless, Democrats proposed scores of amendments, and Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey managed to get a couple passed, even as he voted against the final bill.

Rep. Abigail Spanberger introduced an amendment to exclude Virginia’s coastline from the bill.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

“There’s an element of like, ‘This has all been messaging,'” said Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, noting the bill’s dim chances in the Senate. “But I do think that the basic premise of trying to make a bad bill less bad is important.”

Spanberger herself had fun with open amendments, submitting one that would exclude drilling from areas offshore because the GOP majority was “looking to destroy Virginia’s beautiful coastline.” It failed along party lines.

‘Every rule can’t be open’

Going forward, it will be up to the House Rules Committee, which has historically been controlled by allies of the Speaker, to determine how often floor amendments will be allowed.

And proponents of open rules may have some cause for hope — yet another concession made by McCarthy was the seating of hardline Republican Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, and Thomas Massie of Kentucky on the committee. 

Roy in particular has been a vocal proponent of opening up the process, telling Insider that he would be a “voice” for open rules on the committee but “not a blind one.” 

Spanberger credited Roy — who she considers to be a friend — for the increased use of the process, noting that it “certainly wasn’t the speaker’s intention or desire” to allow for more open amendments. 

“Now look, every rule can’t be open,” said Roy, arguing that some bills were simple enough to keep the rules closed. He also indicated that he would be somewhat deferential to McCarthy and the House Republicans’ agenda while the Congress took its “training wheels off,” given that it’s been years since amendments have been offered on the floor.

And though Republicans managed to crank through nearly 60 amendment votes in just a couple of hours last week, giving members just two minutes to vote on each, timeliness will continue to be important.

“I guess the question is: How do you balance it with time?” said Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna of California, who said he generally favors an open process. “Maybe those things will self-regulate when the novelty wears off.”

Asia’s stockmarkets steadied on Wednesday, with signs of a slowdown in U.S. wages bolstering hopes that the Federal Reserve could hint at an end to interest rate hikes at its meeting later in the day.

Wall Street indexes had rallied, as had bonds to a lesser extent, while the dollar gave up gains overnight when the Fed’s preferred wages gauge, the U.S. employment cost index, showed a 1% rise last quarter, its smallest increase in a year.

MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan (.MIAPJ0000PUS) was up 0.6% in early trade, following a 1.2% drop on Tuesday, while Japan’s Nikkei (.N225) rose 0.7%.

The Fed will announce its rate decision at 1900 GMT, followed by a news conference with Chair Jerome Powell half an hour later.

Interest-rate markets have priced in a slowdown in the cracking pace of rate hikes, with a 25 basis point hike seen bringing the Fed funds rate target range to 4.5-4.75%.

Barring surprises, the focus will be on Powell’s tone. The market is trying to gauge whether he foreshadows an endpoint for hikes in the near future, as well as whether he pushes back on market pricing for rate cuts beginning as soon as the second half of this year.

“The market is anticipating some pushback from Powell, although it’s difficult to pin down how much is enough to convince the market,” said Brian Daingerfield, head of G10 currency strategy at NatWest Markets.

“Anything short of Powell going 10 for 10 hawkish may ultimately be seen as being not hawkish enough. Conversely, the market may take even the smallest dovish concession and run with it.”

Currency trade has been in a holding pattern ahead of the Fed and Bank of England and European Central Bank meetings that follow on Thursday. But the U.S. wages data wiped out some small dollar gains made earlier this week amid some nerves that the Fed sticks to its hawkish stance.

The dollar dropped for a fourth straight month in January, and lost 1.5% on the euro and 0.8% on the yen . Both pairs were steady in early Asia trade, with the euro at $1.0860 and the dollar buying 129.91 yen.

The Australian dollar , which gained 3.5% through January, took a breather at $0.7052.

U.S. treasuries were cautiously firmer in Asia, with benchmark 10-year yields down 2 bps to 3.5105%. S&P 500 futures fell 0.3%.

Solid earnings also lifted Wall Street and the mood overnight, even as company executives struck a cautious tone as many firms brace for an expected economic slowdown.

Exxon (XOM.N) posted a record $59 billion adjusted profit. United Parcel Service (UPS.N), the world’s biggest package delivery firm, beat forecasts and shares rose 4.7%.

Caterpillar (CAT.N) and McDonald’s (MCD.N) shares fell as the companies warned of inflation squeezing profit margins.

Macroeconomic data was less encouraging. Japan’s factory activity contracted for a third straight month in January, a private survey showed on Wednesday.

South Korea posted a record monthly trade deficit for January due mainly to a far worse-than-expected drop in exports. Unemployment rose in New Zealand, though only a little bit and from record lows.

In commodity markets, optimism for demand supported oil prices and Brent crude futures were up 0.23% to $85.67 a barrel. Gold , which rallied on the dollar’s weakness through January, paused at $1,927 an ounce.

Indian conglomerate Adani, meanwhile, completed a $2.5 billion share sale on Tuesday as it fends off an attack from a U.S. short seller. Adani Enterprises (ADEL.NS) stock closed below the lower end of the stock issue price on Tuesday.

Prices for dollar bonds in Adani Group companies were steadying in Asia trade on Wednesday after last week’s rout.

Kevin McCarthy may be willing to remain silent on the enigma that is George Santos, but Santos’s fellow Nassau County GOP members aren’t. As Politico reported, no one wants him out more than them. Leading the charge is Nassau County DA Anne Donnelly, who has pledged to thoroughly investigate George Santos. He is a stain on their party, and the Nassau County DA wants to “shout” him out. It is shameful that because of Donald Trump and his constant lies, it became acceptable to lie, allowing someone like Santos to lie his way into office. He is a big part of what’s wrong with the Republican party today, and if they don’t put a stop to it, they will go back to scrapping their way into office.

In a meeting with their peers this month, Bruce Blakeman, Nassau County Executive, told a gathering that Santos “needs help. This is not a normal person.” Yet, there he sits in Washington, taking a seat on committees and involving himself in legislation that impacts every person in this country. Everything he is and does is based on lies. Who wants a prolific liar making such important decisions? Just last week, the people of New York made their feelings known in a Siena Poll. 59% of registered voters said that Santos should resign, including 49% of Republicans. They’re not turning on him; he’s giving them a bad name. Think cutting out a cancer to stop it from invading the rest of the body, and you get George Santos. His favorability rating is also in the tank, with most voters in his district considering him unfavorable. Guess these numbers aren’t enough for Santos, who said he would step down if the people who voted for him requested that he do so. There you go, Santos. Why are you still in Washington?

The good news is that when elections come around again, it is very unlikely that George Santos will be able to retain his seat. Given that most who voted for him want him gone and the Nassau County DA hot on his trail, he will be lucky to merely lose his seat. In December, Nassau County DA Donnelly said: “The residents of Nassau County and other parts of the third district must have an honest and accountable representative in Congress. No one is above the law and if a crime was committed in this county, we will prosecute it.” Lying isn’t a crime, but Santos is a shyster. He showed that no more than in reports that he pocketed funds raised for a veteran’s dying dog. You can’t get much lower than stealing from a veteran, let along his dog, but it appears that Nassau County may have even more.

According to Politico, Donnelly may well look to the investment fund that is currently under fire from the SEC in which Santos was involved. Lying on documents and falsifying business records is a whole different ballgame, and if it is found that Santos was involved, he may have a lot more to worry about than keeping his seat.

The post The clock is ticking against George Santos appeared first on Palmer Report.